Why?
At least with the Spider-Man/Wolverine arguments, we *know* that other studios have the rights to the characters and have built box-office franchises around them. As for Wanda & Pietro, NOBODY has put them on film yet. And Feige specifically stated long ago that they're legally available to both Marvel Studios for Avengers AND to Fox for X-Men.

they're also established classic Avengers characters.. why wouldn't they be used in an Avengers film?

I would love for Spidey to be in the MCU in some capacity. Alas. Same for the FF, but obviously not as part of Avengers, proper, but in some kind of collaborative role. Then again, if Marvel had the rights to the Fantastic Four, a GotG movie would never have been made. Hmmm.

Also, I don't much care for the rigid Avenger/not Avenger dichotomy. I like to think of it more like individuals/characters that 'exist' in the MCU, who might need to fight alongside a larger group if the level of threat warrants it.

So, I don't care if Spider Man is a 'card carrying' member of the Avengers or not. It just could be that he's needed in a particular situation and is called upon to save/fight someone or the other.

Also, no X-Men. None! The concept of mutants as part of a greater Marvel universe is problematic enough. The concept of mutants as part of a greater Marvel universe and not to have acknowledged them yet is quite insane.

1. Black Panther: Minus some of the troublesome and outdated aspects Marvel's portrayal of African culture.

2. Vision: But without the density shifting BS. That aspect never did make sense to me. I'm a little torn about the Pym-->Ultron-->Evil Vision-->Good Vision creation chain. On one hand, if the upcoming Ant Man movie does not focus on Ultron, then when can we expect to see Vision? On the other, getting Vision while skipping Pym/Ultron altogether doesn't quite feel organic.

3. Pym/Janet: Presented without comment. Well, scratch that... no Giant Man, only shrinking. I get the feeling that the whole becoming-a-giant aspect of Pym was merely a contrivance since a guy who's only power is to become really tiny was simply not interesting/superhero-y enough to generate enough comic book sales. I trust Edgar Wright enough to make Ant Man compelling enough.

4. Dr. Strange: But more because it would make for a compelling solo movie than Dr. Strange playing well with Stark and co. I would also like for a logical exploration of his powers and their limits. Else this would just play as Strange ex machina.

1. Black Panther: Minus some of the troublesome and outdated aspects Marvel's portrayal of African culture.

2. Vision: But without the density shifting BS. That aspect never did make sense to me. I'm a little torn about the Pym-->Ultron-->Evil Vision-->Good Vision creation chain. On one hand, if the upcoming Ant Man movie does not focus on Ultron, then when can we expect to see Vision? On the other, getting Vision while skipping Pym/Ultron altogether doesn't quite feel organic.

3. Pym/Janet: Presented without comment. Well, scratch that... no Giant Man, only shrinking. I get the feeling that the whole becoming-a-giant aspect of Pym was merely a contrivance since a guy who's only power is to become really tiny was simply not interesting/superhero-y enough to generate enough comic book sales. I trust Edgar Wright enough to make Ant Man compelling enough.

4. Dr. Strange: But more because it would make for a compelling solo movie than Dr. Strange playing well with Stark and co. I would also like for a logical exploration of his powers and their limits. Else this would just play as Strange ex machina.

I'd love a Doc Strange solo movie, not so keen on him being in the team.

I'd love a Doc Strange solo movie, not so keen on him being in the team.

Yea, agreed. Like I said (though, maybe on the wrong thread ) I don't necessarily want to see him on the Avengers team-proper, but would love to see Dr. Strange in an Averngers movie. On one hand I'm not sure a solo Dr. Strange movie would work, but on the other, I don't think you can introduce him into the universe without a solo movie.

You know, all this talk of Spider-Man, Wolverine, Dr. Strange etc., appearing in an Avengers sequel has me scratching my head.

Yeah, i know Bendis has decided to make practically every Marvel character under the sun an Avenger these days in the comics, but honestly there are several key members from the Avengers comics earliest days that deserve to be on the big screen by virtue of their seniority and contributions to AVENGERS mythology:

That Iron Man and Sony's Spider-Man managed to be in the same commercial, has to mean something. They were already willing to use the Oscorp Tower in Avengers, which only fell through because there was no time anymore. I don't think that easter eggs such as a newspaper photo are that out of the question anymore.

If Dr. Strange is introduced in the MCU, I think he'll show up in an Avenger movie. The general audience would be confused as to why this awesome, powerful sorcerer isn't joining the team. Plus, Marvel would use the modern comics as to why he'd be on the team.

Though, I don't think it'd last for long. I can see Marvel trying to do a Defenders spin-off in the future.

That Iron Man and Sony's Spider-Man managed to be in the same commercial, has to mean something. They were already willing to use the Oscorp Tower in Avengers, which only fell through because there was no time anymore. I don't think that easter eggs such as a newspaper photo are that out of the question anymore.

Iron Man and Spider-Man in the same commercial means only one thing: Sony sold Spidey's merchandising rights to Disney over a year ago. Therefore Disney controls the use of Spider-Man's image in commercials as well as the sales of toys, clothing and other merchandise featuring him and characters from his universe. The sale happened because Sony was so desperately cash-strapped that it was forced to give up its most lucrative merchandising asset for a quick infusion of money.

Iron Man and Spider-Man in the same commercial means only one thing: Sony sold Spidey's merchandising rights to Disney over a year ago. Therefore Disney controls the use of Spider-Man's image in commercials as well as the sales of toys, clothing and other merchandise featuring him and characters from his universe. The sale happened because Sony was so desperately cash-strapped that it was forced to give up its most lucrative merchandising asset for a quick infusion of money.

I don't really want him as an Avenger. I'd love to have them connected though. That's what I've been saying all along. I just want there to be a hint that they exist in the same universe and proof that they do.

I think Dr. Strange should appear in an Avengers film without joining the team. A contact, with some explanation for his continual non-involvement other than "We don't like Bendis' Avengers." Wolverine's cameo in XMFC is a good start, but I would like it if Strange gives them some asset or pointer or something before retreating off to some other dimension or returning to gathering his energies for the next interdimensional conflict.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christopher_M

... it's a billion and a half dollar franchise pure win-win for both studios..

Q: Now that The Avengers has done so well, it seems like the other studios with Marvel properties can see the advantage of making a deal. Can you see a world where this generation of X-Men could be in an Avengers movie?

Here's my question: Why would Disney/Marvel want those characters back? They are making a ton of money without them. Why would they pay money to make money they're already making? With characters whose continuities don't even fit with the MCU? That's not a win-win for the studios. The only people who profit from such deals are Fox/Sony and fans who like to imagine what's happening off-screen and between films.

I think Dr. Strange should appear in an Avengers film without joining the team. A contact, with some explanation for his continual non-involvement other than "We don't like Bendis' Avengers." Wolverine's cameo in XMFC is a good start, but I would like it if Strange gives them some asset or pointer or something before retreating off to some other dimension or returning to gathering his energies for the next interdimensional conflict.

Here's my question: Why would Disney/Marvel want those characters back? They are making a ton of money without them. Why would they pay money to make money they're already making? With characters whose continuities don't even fit with the MCU? That's not a win-win for the studios. The only people who profit from such deals are Fox/Sony and fans who like to imagine what's happening off-screen and between films.

To be fair: Marvel Studios are making a mint off any movie that has Iron Man in it. Spidey and Wolverine blow the doors off the box office of any other Marvel Studios character. It's not hard to understand why they could profit from adding Parker and Logan to their stable.